September 29, 2008 Market Crash

[aquarius]

Well, if that's the only thing you can think of...

[fdsman]

Lets make a little MRE Info poll on who is voting for who.

I'll start off by saying I'm voting for McCain.

[bishopmarine]

i have been all over the freaking place on this one fdsman. i thought i had my mind made up but i dont. i may not know till i vote in the morning. but you have my word i will make public my choice tommorow as soon as i get to work. i may even vote for bob barr so im not responsible for who gets elected.

[jfko6]

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger For John McCain

[bl00k]

Well, I guess we could give them one-way tickets to the Netherlands, They can live on the dole while they plot to kill YOU!
Problem solved !

They already live here. A few convicted terrorists are now in jail and will be released after they've done their time (they didnt get a life-sentence). They did plot to kill people, not specifically me, but more likely innocent bystanders and politicians. So what, am i supposed to be scared now? Never. Police and other law enforcement agencies try what they can to find and stop those people according to the law. You'll only get convicted if theres enough evidence that you are actually trying to prepare a terrorist attack. But this fear-mongering doesn't work that well with me. Making the West live in fear is one of the goals of the terrorists. And by the way, theres a much larger chance for me to get killed when i hit the road in a few hours, but that doesnt really do anything to me (or pretty much everybody else), so why fear terrorists?

Tomorrow the United States will elect a new President. Our current President Bush did not create jihadism. It existed before he became president. It existed before his father became President. The United States will not cease to fight Islamic radicalism. Liberating Nazism, Communism, Totalitarianism and now jihadism has seem to become a full time job for the United States. Because many countries can't seem to see the writing on the wall. And once the door has been opened for freedom democracy will flourish. It's either fight terrorism and pursue peace. Or, see a mushroom cloud rise over some city in the world. WAKE UP!!!

That's just not true. There arent just two choices. There are millions of choices. Invading Iraq & Afghanistan is one choice. Doing nothing is another. And then there are millions of other choices in between and beyond. Some things are worth fighting for, sure, but i suggest picking your fights a little more careful.

So Iraq has been liberated back in 2003. 'Mission Accomplished' or whatever. How then are Iraqis and Americans still dying over there? The Iraqi people have been freed from the dictator Saddam, yet still there seems to be an endless supply of people who want to fight the US. Why do people want to fight the US if it only wants to do good?

I still don't buy into the fact that the US just wants to free the Afghani and Iraqi people. I'm sure a lot of people are better off now, but if there wasn't some kind of advantage for the US, why start a war if theres nothing to gain?

And lastly, the US doesn't *have* to police the world. Why is it the job of the US to free the world of all problems? I'm sure you have enough trouble at home. Think of what could be done with two trillion dollars being spent in the US instead of being blown up in Iraq. I know, without the US i might have been speaking german or russian, or i might have never been born. But America's foreign policy has always been, in my humble opinion, to increase or maintain America's dominance. As is the case right now with Iraq and Afghanistan. So when i heard Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz or any other neocon talking about 'freeing people', i always knew they were lying there asses off. It's not a noble fight, just another dominance struggle. And ofcourse partly about making money. If you don't understand something, try to find out where the money is flowing.

[jfko6]

bl00k wrote:

That's just not true. There arent just two choices. There are millions of choices. Invading Iraq & Afghanistan is one choice. Doing nothing is another. And then there are millions of other choices in between and beyond. Some things are worth fighting for, sure, but i suggest picking your fights a little more careful.

Since I already answered these questions time and again you seem to be smarter than our President. You tell us what these "millions" of choices are than. Doing nothing is NOT a choice. That's pretty naive.

So Iraq has been liberated back in 2003. 'Mission Accomplished' or whatever. How then are Iraqis and Americans still dying over there? The Iraqi people have been freed from the dictator Saddam, yet still there seems to be an endless supply of people who want to fight the US. Why do people want to fight the US if it only wants to do good?

Because people want what we have. Freedom will prevail however.

I still don't buy into the fact that the US just wants to free the Afghani and Iraqi people. I'm sure a lot of people are better off now, but if there wasn't some kind of advantage for the US, why start a war if theres nothing to gain?

We didn't start the war.

And lastly, the US doesn't *have* to police the world. Why is it the job of the US to free the world of all problems? I'm sure you have enough trouble at home. Think of what could be done with two trillion dollars being spent in the US instead of being blown up in Iraq. I know, without the US i might have been speaking german or russian, or i might have never been born. But America's foreign policy has always been, in my humble opinion, to increase or maintain America's dominance. As is the case right now with Iraq and Afghanistan. So when i heard Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz or any other neocon talking about 'freeing people', i always knew they were lying there asses off. It's not a noble fight, just another dominance struggle. And ofcourse partly about making money. If you don't understand something, try to find out where the money is flowing.

We didn't have to save your country either from Nazism after you were invaded in WWII.

I'm afraid you like many in your part of the world including some in The United States argue (as I already said) argue from a liberal pacifist point of view. That philosophy implies that all War is wrong. People cringe at the sound of war. It was the do nothing mentality (which is not a choice) that allowed your neighbor Adolf Hitler to rise to power and kill six million Jews during WWII. The whole world was to blame for that.

The kind of evil that exists in this world cannot go unchecked. Our new President that will be elected today along will his advisors will have to make tough choices. They are not easy choices. It is the Presidents job to defend the the American People against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That is what is written in our constitution. To deny that these Islamic radicals are not trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons is just asking for trouble. If they get one they will try to use it. They must be stopped.

Out of time: Radical Islam Taking Over Europe & West

[bl00k]

Since I already answered these questions time and again you seem to be smarter than our President. You tell us what these "millions" of choices are than. Doing nothing is NOT a choice. That's pretty naive.

I don't wanna brag but yes, i do think i am smarter than Bush.

Doing nothing *is* a choice. Now if it's the *right* choice, thats something different. But to give you an idea of other choices that couldve been chosen after 9/11 (next to Bush's choice and doing nothing);

-Invade Afghanistan with NATO, talk to leaders of Iran, KSA, Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait and other Middle Eastern countries to work together to fight terrorism and to bring Saddam & the Taliban to their knees.
-Not invade anything. Work to build/maintain a country that's good to its citizens, and try to create an atmosphere in which terrorists don't stand a chance of finding help.
-Help countries that are willing in the Middle East create a better life for their citizens, if freedom/democracy does actually spread, then that's the way to go.
-Change American lifestyles so America doesnt rely on foreign resources anymore and thus doesn't have to care about other countries.

These are just some examples. There's loads of alternatives, you just have to be creative.

Because people want what we have. Freedom will prevail however.

I sincerely hope so.

We didn't start the war.

Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan attacked the US, Al Qaeda did.

We didn't have to save your country either from Nazism after you were invaded in WWII.

Thats right.

I'm afraid you like many in your part of the world including some in The United States argue (as I already said) argue from a liberal pacifist point of view. That philosophy implies that all War is wrong. People cringe at the sound of war. It was the do nothing mentality (which is not a choice) that allowed your neighbor Adolf Hitler to rise to power and kill six million Jews during WWII. The whole world was to blame for that.

I'm not really pacifist. I'm not afraid to use violence, but it has to be carefully selected when to use it, when not to use it and how to use it. There are enough things worth fighting for. I'm all in for a larger army for the netherlands, people like me a considered militaristic. Dont know if thats true or not but i'm definitely not pacifist.

The kind of evil that exists in this world cannot go unchecked. Our new President that will be elected today along will his advisors will have to make tough choices. They are not easy choices. It is the Presidents job to defend the the American People against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That is what is written in our constitution. To deny that these Islamic radicals are not trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons is just asking for trouble. If they get one they will try to use it. They must be stopped.

They must be stopped indeed. I'm just not sure the chosen option is the way to do this.

[jfko6]

I don't wanna brag but yes, i do think i am smarter than Bush.

Since you think you're smarter than our President, I think I don't want to speak to you anymore.

You're being arrogant and telling lies to support your arguments.

Your most recent lie: "Invade Afghanistan with NATO"

We did that right after 9/11. NATO is in Afghanistan.

Shows how much you know.


NATO in Afghanistan
http://www.nato.int/issues/afghanistan/ ... tsheet.htm

NATO took command and co-ordination of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003. ISAF is NATO's first mission outside the Euro-Atlantic area. ISAF operates in Afghanistan under a UN mandate and will continue to operate according to current and future UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions. ISAF’s mission was initially limited to Kabul. Resolution 1510 passed by the UNSC on 13 October 2003 opened the way to a wider role for ISAF to support the Government of Afghanistan beyond Kabul.

[bishopmarine]

whoooo hooooo go jfk06!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[aquarius]

I have been accused of spreading lies, and now dirtbag (you Dirt Bag!) likes me to be killed by terrorist who first should be exported from Guantanamo Bay to Holland. LOL, we will raise hughe import taxes, so they can not get in!
But the worst still has to come, because IMHO bl00k is indeed more intelligent than Bush!
... Okay, I was kidding. Of course is GW Bush a very intelligent man. I really have no doubt about his intelligence. Nor have I any doubt about how vicious and how hungry for power he is.

My only advise for every person is: Be aware that no government, no official, no political organisation will ever tell you the thruth. The best they can do is tell you THEIR truth. There is always at least one hidden agenda, most more. It is always about power and money. Nothing is the way it seems. Their secret armies/services will never reveal what and how they did influence things. Very occaisionally their covert actions becomes known, but most of the times no one will ever know.
Just realise this.
And always question someone's intentions, and what and how he is doing things. It is your right to know the truth, but you have to do your d@mn best to get it!

And now something complete different:
Did you guys knew that the armed conflict in Afghanistan is officially a "non-international armed conflict"? It is considered a conflict between the internal taliban groups and Afghan armed forces which are supported by NATO troops.
I am still wondering why we didn't attack Pakistan. Most of the terrorist were trained over there, and still are! Maybe Pakistan was not attacked because they also have nucleair weapons...?